Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
EPPiSM Baner

No. 3/2025/75 (2025)

Artykuły

The 2030 Agenda in the Face of Technological Innovation: Legal and Social Challenges Related to Cell-Cultured Meat

DOI: https://doi.org/10.52097/eppism.10224  [Google Scholar]
Published: 2025-09-16

Abstract

The article analyses the role of cell-cultured meat as a technological innovation supporting the implementation of selected Sustainable Development Goals of the 2030 Agenda. This technology can contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, limiting the consumption of natural resources and improving food security. At the same time, its implementation faces numerous legal, ethical and social challenges, including the lack of consistent international regulations, certain undefined terms, and a variety of approaches in countries such as Singapore, the USA, Israel and the European Union. The article highlights the need to harmonise regulations and assess the long-term impact of this technology on the global food system in the context of sustainable development.

References

  1. Blicharz J., Klat-Wertelecka L., Rutkowska-Tomaszewska E. (red.), Ubóstwo w Polsce, Wrocław 2014. [Google Scholar]
  2. Ching L., Zainal N., Luang-In V., Ma N., Lab-Based Meat the Future Food, ‘Environmental Advances’ 2022, 10. [Google Scholar]
  3. Davison J., GM Plants: Science, Politics and EC Regulations, ‘Plant Science’ 2010, 2. [Google Scholar]
  4. Formici G., ‘Meating’ the Future: Alcune riflessioni sulla necessità di promuovere un attento dibattito regolatorio in materia di c.d. carne sintetica, ‘Forum di Quaderni Costituzionali’ 2023, 2. [Google Scholar]
  5. Fukuda-Parr S., Global Goals as a Policy Tool: Intended and Unintended Consequences, ‘Journal of Human Development and Capabilities’, 2014, 15. [Google Scholar]
  6. Gerber P. J., Steinfeld H., Henderson B., Mottet A., Opio C., Dijkman J. et al., Tackling Climate Change Through Livestock: A Global Assessment of Emissions and Mitigation Opportunities, Food and Agriculture Organization of The United Nations, Roma 2013. [Google Scholar]
  7. Hickel J., The Divide: : A Brief Guide to Global Inequality and its Solutions, London 2017. [Google Scholar]
  8. Horton H., UK First European Country to Approve Lab-Grown Meat, Starting with Pet Food, ‘The Guardian’, 17.07.2024. [Google Scholar]
  9. In 2013 Global Food Policy Report, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), A. Marble, H. Fritschel (red.), Washington 2014. [Google Scholar]
  10. Klein Z., Chief Rabbi: Cultured meat is considered a vegetable but can’t be consumed with dairy, ‘The Jerusalem Post’ 2023. https://www.jpost.com/judaism/article-728978. [Google Scholar]
  11. Lim W. K. L., Cultivated Meat in Singapore: The Road to Commercialization, ‘International Journal of Zoology and Animal Biology’, 2023, 4. [Google Scholar]
  12. Mahler D. G., Yonzan N., Lakner Ch., The Impact of COVID-19 on Global Inequality and Poverty, Policy Research Working Paper, Washington, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  13. Mazhorina M., Sustainable Development Law: Essence, Subject and Methodology, Lex Russica 2022. [Google Scholar]
  14. Mustajoki J., Borchardt S., Büttner R., et al., Ambitiousness of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) Targets: Classification and Implications for Policy Making, ‘Discover Sustainability’ 2022, 3, https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s43621-022-00104-8. [Google Scholar]
  15. Perkowski M., Kosicki A., Chrzanowski S., Realizacja celów zrównoważonego rozwoju Agendy 2030. Perspektywa regionalna, „Prawo i Więź” 2023, 1. [Google Scholar]
  16. Post M. J., Cultured Meat from Steam Cells: Challenges and Prospects, ‘Meat Science’ 2012, 3. [Google Scholar]
  17. Post M. J., Levenberg S., Kaplan D. L., Genovese N., Fu J., Bryant C. J. et al., Scientific, Sustainability and Regulatory Challenges of Cultured Meat, ‘Nature Food’ 2020, 7. [Google Scholar]
  18. Pradhan P., Warchold A., A Threefold Approach to Rescue the 2030 Agenda from Failing, ‘National Science Review’ 2023, 7. [Google Scholar]
  19. Prawa i wolności I i II generacji, red. A. Florczak, B. Bolechów, Toruń 2006. [Google Scholar]
  20. Risner D., Kim Y., Nguyen C., Siegel J. B., Spang E. S., Environmental Impacts of Cultured Meat: A Cradle-to-Gate Life Cycle Assessment, , Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory 2023, file:///Users/admin/Desktop/Environmental_impacts_of_cultured_meat_A_cradle-to.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  21. Roy B., Hagappa A., Ramalingam Y. D., Mahalingam N., A. Shaik Alaudeen, A Review on Lab-Grown Meat: Advantages and Disadvantages, ‘Quest International Journal of Medical and Health Sciences’ 2021, 1. [Google Scholar]
  22. Sexton A. E., Eating for the Post-Anthropocene: Alternative Proteins and the Biopolitics of Edibility, ‘Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers’ 2018, 4. [Google Scholar]
  23. Siegrist M., Sütterlin B., Importance of Perceived Naturalness for Acceptance of Food Additives and Cultured Meat, ‘Appetite’ 2017, 113. [Google Scholar]
  24. Sokołowski Ł. M., The Placing of Novel Foods on the EU Market in the Light of New EU Regulations, Poznań 2020. [Google Scholar]
  25. Stephens N., Sexton A. E., Driessen C., Making Sense of Making Meat: Key Moments in the First 20 Years of Tissue Engineering Muscle to Make Food, ‘Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems’ 2019, 3. [Google Scholar]
  26. Suchańska K., Wójcikowska B., GMO – nadzieja, czy droga do zatracenia?, ‘No Limits’ 2023, 2. [Google Scholar]
  27. Tuszyńska L., Edukacja ekologiczna w perspektywie zrównoważonego rozwoju, ‘Studies in Global Ethics and Global Education’, 2017, 7. [Google Scholar]
  28. Zdrowe style życia: wyzwania ekonomiczne i społeczne, red. W. Nowak, K. Szalonka, Wrocław 2019. [Google Scholar]

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Similar Articles

1 2 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.